They've said they don't want to make a normalized raid size, especially mid-expansion, as this absolutely forces everyone to change the way they play the game. You'd force every guild in the world to change their rosters, to either recruit 5 more or drop 10, with a tier about to be released. Because of this, I don't see this 15-man style happening, at least not now, maybe after the final MoP tier is released and has been out for several months, to give time to prepare for the next expansion.

I also don't see shared lockout being removed, as it was stated this being done in Asia does not set a precedent for the US/Europe. We'll see what happens, I still think a 1/2 upgrade wouldn't be a big deal, though it has been denied as the solution by Blizzard. Plus since 5.2 won't feature upgrade-able items until maybe 5.3, the 10m group would be justified in saying they can't attain 25m level gear for an entire patch.

In the end, as a 25m raider, I don't need it to be a gear incentive, but it would be nice to have something to encourage the better players to consider 25m. I'm currently 7/16H in a 25m guild, but I know it would be easy enough to go looking for a 10m and achieve more, simply because it is easier to find 9 other skilled players with compatible schedules than to do the same for 25m. World first is a different crowd so let's not bring this into it.

They've said they don't want to make a normalized raid size, especially mid-expansion, as this absolutely forces everyone to change the way they play the game. You'd force every guild in the world to change their rosters, to either recruit 5 more or drop 10, with a tier about to be released. Because of this, I don't see this 15-man style happening, at least not now, maybe after the final MoP tier is released and has been out for several months, to give time to prepare for the next expansion.

I doubt that Blizzard would ever change to a 15-man setting.

It would create so many problems, 10mans would need to suddenly recruit more people and 25man to cut people.

Altough in this scenario 25man could "win", they could cut 10 of their worst members to create a better 15man Raid.

10Man however, had to find 5 equally skilled persons for their raid, it is even hard to find a single decently skilled person for a slot, the flood of kicked 25man raiders wouldn't really help, because they got kicked for reason.

Not to consider that some Raids might quit altogether because they simply say "We don't want to recruit 5 new people / cut 10 people to be able to raid", for 10man Raids that cannot find 5 equally skilled members, the timer until this happens would be like a Death clock.

Overall, the raiding community might not be able to withstand such a huge change without suffering huge losses.

Last edited by Kralljin; 2013-01-06 at 11:08 PM.

Too often, we are mistaken for druidic types. perhaps that's true for some shaman, but do not let yourself be plagued by the ignorant belief that we are always peaceful.
Nothing about what I do is harmonious. I command the elements to my will. There is nothing offered in return. I would have it no other way.

It would create so many problems, 10mans would need to suddenly recruit more people and 25man to cut people.

Altough in this scenario 25man could "win", they could cut 10 of their worst members to create a better 15man Raid.

10Man however, had to find 5 equally skilled persons for their raid, it is even hard to find a single decently skilled person for a slot, the flood of kicked 25man raiders wouldn't really help, because they got kicked for reason.

Not to consider that some Raids might quit altogether because they simply say "We don't want to recruit 5 new people / cut 10 people to be able to raid", for 10man Raids that cannot find 5 equally skilled members, the timer until this happens would be like a Death clock.

Overall, the raiding community might not be able to withstand such a huge change without suffering huge losses.

At least it wouldn't be as drastic as the change from 40 to 25/10 we had already in the past, and we got used to it.

At least it wouldn't be as drastic as the change from 40 to 25/10 we had already in the past, and we got used to it.

Different times my friend.

Many Guilds were raiding with other guilds together, not high end raids but "lower" raids were often formed by 2 guilds, so this cut simply told them to raid with on their own.

Also, there was only a single size, no 2 sizes as they are now which is important because both sizes are affected by this differently.

And lastly, during BC you still had new players coming into the game so that the total number of players grew, which helped to form new Raids.

Now, there aren't that much new players anymore as during Bc / Wotlk.

Too often, we are mistaken for druidic types. perhaps that's true for some shaman, but do not let yourself be plagued by the ignorant belief that we are always peaceful.
Nothing about what I do is harmonious. I command the elements to my will. There is nothing offered in return. I would have it no other way.

It would create so many problems, 10mans would need to suddenly recruit more people and 25man to cut people.

Altough in this scenario 25man could "win", they could cut 10 of their worst members to create a better 15man Raid.

10Man however, had to find 5 equally skilled persons for their raid, it is even hard to find a single decently skilled person for a slot, the flood of kicked 25man raiders wouldn't really help, because they got kicked for reason.

Not to consider that some Raids might quit altogether because they simply say "We don't want to recruit 5 new people / cut 10 people to be able to raid", for 10man Raids that cannot find 5 equally skilled members, the timer until this happens would be like a Death clock.

Overall, the raiding community might not be able to withstand such a huge change without suffering huge losses.

They already made a change like this at the start of BC when they transitioned raids from 40 man to 25 man. That type of change is viable if you do it at the end of an expansion. There is always raider attrition at the end of expansions, and there is also usually at least a 3-4 month farm period before a new expansion is released to. 25 man guilds would be able to drop down to 15 man, just by not recruiting replacements for raiders that quit over the end of the tier/start of the new expansion. It would actually be more than 10 people you would need to drop though. A typical healthy 25 man roster needs about 35 people. and you probably would want to go down to 21-22 for a 15 man raid roster, so it's more like 12-15 people that would have to be dropped, mostly through attrition.

As far as 10 man guilds, they would probably have more difficulties, because they would need to recruit to expand their roster by 50%, but would hopefully have 6+ months notice to do it. They would have to choose between opening heavy recruitment, or merging with another 10 man guild. 2 10 man guilds that merge would probably have just about exactly the correct roster size by the start of the next expansion assuming roster turn over.

That said, doing something like this for 5.2, with at most a couple of months of lead time would be catastrophic to the entire raiding community. I can't imagine it's a serious consideration until the end of this expansion.

I think removing the shared lockout would both solve the issue AND be amazingly controversial. All those 10m "world first" guilds needing to find another 15 ppl for the roster again or get outgeared heavily by the competition.

I think it would actually be "a bit" controversial--just like the phrase he used. It would certainly be different from 10/25 raiding in that the gear we would be getting and the challenge associated with it would be markedly different. Ten man gear was easier making it especially tedious back in Wrath; this would be a touch better. We would gear faster, we would likely get burned out faster, but they could always argue that giving us "more things to do" isn't a bad idea.

As you point out, it definitely reinvents the 25m PuG and that just has to be viewed as a positive. It also cannot destroy 10m raiding while it also buffs 25m. It's only the burnout. I admit that I'm not sure how I'd feel about raiding 4 nights a week instead of 2...

more things to do in the area of gaming that you like wouldn't be a bad thing.

A lot of the critisism from the raiding population about the tight connection of daylies and rep grinding. Is probably because it is areas of the game that they do not like but that they feel compelled to do in order to stay competetive, in their minds,in the part of the that they really like which is raiding.
Sure a lot of people argue that you do not have to grind reps and daylies, but if your a person who wants to give it your best in this hobby that you might consider a sport well then the position that daylies and repgrinding is optional is simply not valid. And then it ends up being a question if you can find the motivation and most importantly time to do what you feel is necessary to be competetive in your sport.

Personally i think raiders would probably rather for some time raid a new raid instance 2 times a week with their main than having to raid and do daylies rep grind. So 10/25 seperate lockout although controversial as stated above could be nice.

Many Guilds were raiding with other guilds together, not high end raids but "lower" raids were often formed by 2 guilds, so this cut simply told them to raid with on their own.

Also, there was only a single size, no 2 sizes as they are now which is important because both sizes are affected by this differently.

And lastly, during BC you still had new players coming into the game so that the total number of players grew, which helped to form new Raids.

Now, there aren't that much new players anymore as during Bc / Wotlk.

I knew none guilds going together so they could raid 40man (at least not on the realms I played), not sure what are you talking about there. In fact, when the split happened a lot of guilds were formed (not merged as you try to imply) because older guilds had way too many people. The same will happen if they change to 15man.

It doesn't matter there are 2 sizes now, it will affect the playerbase the same way affected the playerbase on vanilla. Be it recruiting or kicking. Both are a hassle.

I still see new players or rerolls or even alts looking to raid, wasn't the last number 10M subscribers?

As you should be able to see, the question may have been about LFR but the answer was about 25s in general. They may take more logistical (read: outside of the actual raid instance) planning, but they are much, much easier to execute and reward more drops per boss than 10m.

Im completly against the idea of doing anything to "save" 25 man raiding, ppl dont do 25 because they dont want to, theres already enought incentive, the speed in wich a 25 man raiding team gear is enormous both because more loot per player drops and also because the number of itens that drop make it alot easier for specific itens you or someone else is interested at dropping, you can go 10 raid weeks whithout seeing your Elegon trinket dropping on 10 man for instance and it wont be back luck, the probability of this happening is not very low, while on 25 youre more tham likely to see the same trinket dropping 5 or so times in 10 weeks.

Just leave it as it is the comunity drifted towards 10 man naturaly, its pretty clear wich model ppl prefer.

Im completly against the idea of doing anything to "save" 25 man raiding, ppl dont do 25 because they dont want to, theres already enought incentive, the speed in wich a 25 man raiding team gear is enormous both because more loot per player drops and also because the number of itens that drop make it alot easier for specific itens you or someone else is interested at dropping, you can go 10 raid weeks whithout seeing your Elegon trinket dropping on 10 man for instance and it wont be back luck, the probability of this happening is not very low, while on 25 youre more tham likely to see the same trinket dropping 5 or so times in 10 weeks.

Just leave it as it is the comunity drifted towards 10 man naturaly, its pretty clear wich model ppl prefer.

Loot per player drop is lower on 25 than 10. 10man gear up individuals faster than 25 while progression and the coin made it even worse. There is no incentive to raid 25 but the feel of doing something harder.

As you should be able to see, the question may have been about LFR but the answer was about 25s in general. They may take more logistical (read: outside of the actual raid instance) planning, but they are much, much easier to execute and reward more drops per boss than 10m.

There is a reason that LFR isn't 10m

Yup there is, that reason is the instance is tuned in a way where 8-9 people can carry the others and it gives shorter queues as there is more dps per healers/tanks. That is not related to actual raiding at all as 25HC is tuned in a way where you cant carry people while being in progress, you are free to believe 25 man is a joke in comparison but that's is far from the actual tuning when going above normal modes. There is quite a few mechanics that will wipe the entire 25 man group from just 1 player fucking up, wall flower right there. Quoting things out of context and twisting words wont prove anything.

There's one more thing that people often miss...every time 25 man guild dies a community that said 25 man guild was dies as well. Large, breathing, live community dies. It's hurting the game so much. And with all due respect 10 man guilds are rarely community on its own. 25 man guilds are always one. And having big guilds dying is destroying one of the pillars that made this game great.

Loot per player drop is lower on 25 than 10. 10man gear up individuals faster than 25 while progression and the coin made it even worse. There is no incentive to raid 25 but the feel of doing something harder.

That is completely, 100% false. 10 mans drop 2 items per boss - 1 item per 5 players. 25 mans drop 6 items per boss - 4.2 items per player. On top of that, even if it were even, you'd gear up 50% faster in a 25 man because there are more chances of individual things dropping and less chances of items dropping that are of no use to anyone in the raid. If the primary concern is gear and how fast you gear, people would already want to be doing 25 man.

Ghostcrawler specifically stated he wanted to figure out a way to reward the leadership of 25m guilds for their extra "logistical effort" (i.e. OUTSIDE of the raid instance.) My rebuttal should be obvious; they are already rewarded with faster nerfs to content through higher gear drops, more battle rezes per attempt, easier comp requirements and much, much less executional responsibility per person.

If you want to give their guild leaders/ officers a few extra gold per kill or whatever for having to deal with a few more minor details outside of raid, so be it. But the majority of 25m raiders already have plenty of incentives to keep on coasting to their easy epics.

Ghostcrawler specifically stated he wanted to figure out a way to reward the leadership of 25m guilds for their extra "logistical effort" (i.e. OUTSIDE of the raid instance.) My rebuttal should be obvious; they are already rewarded with faster nerfs to content through higher gear drops, more battle rezes per attempt, easier comp requirements and much, much less executional responsibility per person.

If you want to give their guild leaders/ officers a few extra gold per kill or whatever for having to deal with a few more minor details outside of raid, so be it. But the majority of 25m raiders already have plenty of incentives to keep on coasting to their easy epics.

You're the one quoting things out of context and twisting words by having that sig which was talking about LFR only.
And while you're at 'easy' epics go and ask Paragon what they think of raid size, how easy 10 man was for them and why they wish they could still raid 25 so they actually have some competition.
And to counter your false statements again:
'More battle rezes per attempt': There's 25 people vs 10, much more chances something will go wrong thus 3 battle rezes. You could even argue that there should be more since on any harder progress boss you have more, not less, excecutional responsibility in 25 man due to needing to keep focus and composure of 25 people without any room for mistake compared to 10. Also logistical efforts devs were talking about were in the raids due to vastly higher difficulty of organizing and managing 25 people and making them work as one unit.

Main difference in difficulty between 10 and 25 man comes on harder bosses due to 10 mans being balanced around not always having all the raid buffs needed and ideal comps. Because of that you have higher dps and hps requirements in 25 man raids since it's expected (rightly so) to have all that. But when you have best 10 man guilds that are basically always able to get the best comps and all raid buffs needed then it makes some hard fights trivial compared to their 25 man counterparts. Just look at the most magnificent recent raid boss, Ragnaros heroic. It wasn't even comparable.

Why do you even bother discussing with Espe? It's so damn obvious that he has never played 25 man on a higher level nor do I think that he is part of a good 10 man raid. It's true that some bosses are harder in 10 man and others in 25 man, that will always be the case since it's not possible to tune it completely equal, deal with it. However, if you look at Cataclysm in general, there were more harder 25 man bosses than 10 man. This, however, doesn't mean that it is harder for one specific player. It is not harder for one player run out of the group with a debuff in 25 man than in 10 man, but as there are more players, there's more possibility of failure. Therefore, the boss is harder in 25 man even though it's not harder for a specific player. Apart from that, many bosses become difficult through tuning, and most 10 man Enrage timers are not as tightly tuned as in 25 man (Ultraxion, Baleroc, ...).

As a conclusion, if an equally skilled 25 man and 10 man raid would race for a first kill, the 10 man raid should usually get it first even though both players play equally good. Still, it's not harder in 25 man for a specific player, it's just more likely that one player fails and therefore more unlikely that everything runs properly.

Could I get some confirmation on how many items drop from 25 ? I really could have swore it was 6 items, and I'm generally the lootmaster in our raids so I figured I had a good idea -- but I was talking with my guild about these topics (how they plan to incentivize 25s without disincentivizing 10s) and they assured me it's only 5 pieces that drop in 25.

I've seen folks in here referencing 6 drops from 25 but I'm pretty confused about it, since multiple people in my guild maintained it's only 5 drops

Could I get some confirmation on how many items drop from 25 ? I really could have swore it was 6 items, and I'm generally the lootmaster in our raids so I figured I had a good idea -- but I was talking with my guild about these topics (how they plan to incentivize 25s without disincentivizing 10s) and they assured me it's only 5 pieces that drop in 25.

I've seen folks in here referencing 6 drops from 25 but I'm pretty confused about it, since multiple people in my guild maintained it's only 5 drops